Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

neilrobinson

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Aug 21, 2004
300
0
Perth, WA, Australia
ok, just a question, i am in australia so i dont have itunes store, and dont intend to try this if we do get it.... please steve.... please, anyways

you buy a song... you can burn it 4 times or something and chuck it on a few ipods as well... what it stopping you, burning it to cd and then ripping it as a mp3 either in itunes or another program, allowing you to use it as much as you want?

am i right or just stupid? :eek:
 
neilrobinson said:
ok, just a question, i am in australia so i dont have itunes store, and dont intend to try this if we do get it.... please steve.... please, anyways

you buy a song... you can burn it 4 times or something and chuck it on a few ipods as well... what it stopping you, burning it to cd and then ripping it as a mp3 either in itunes or another program, allowing you to use it as much as you want?

am i right or just stupid? :eek:

Nothing is stopping you, except for pure cost benefit analysis. Do you know how big of a pain in the ass it is to have to type in the file names of every track on every cd?? And according to your theory youre doing all the work AND you already paid for it!!! Just ask yourself this: Just who is gettin screwed here? Of course you can do it, and I guess it makes sense for one or two tracks, or one or two albums that you really need more flexability out of. But make a habit out of it and you'll soon realize why iTunes is doing so well.
 
Apple knows that you can do this, but you lose some quality along the way by doing this, and there is nothing stoping you at all, but it is a hassle to burn it and then rip it, but it is a workaournd, except that you do lose quality, which is why its OK i guess
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.